Govt proposal to increase fuel economy

[CaddyXLR-V]

http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0.../C01-330449.htm
Do you agree with the proposal, or disagree?

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

automakers successfully fought off any mandates that would require cars and trucks go farther on a gallon of gas

First of all, that's just a flat out lie.

Secondly, of course it is linked with ONLY the big three (Instead of including Toyota, Nissan and the others involved) what a surprise.

Domenici played a key role in shaping the just passed energy bill, which did not include fuel economy hikes.

Yet another jab... Clear to see where this "journalists" political views lie.

Larry Craig, another senior Republican who has rejected fuel economy

Okay, as if you didn't alREADY notice, here's yet ANOTHER jab...

*******

I think overall it's a good deal...

Let's face it, GM and Ford are either going to have to be saved somehow or get MAJOR concessions from the UAW (Yeah, right) or they're toast.

Any relief on Health Care would be great and 3% can't be that hard to achieve.

[regfootball]

a neat idea in concept. the govt will get stuck with a lot of this health care bill eventually anyways. even 2% a year would help. Edited October 1, 2005 by regfootball

[lanky9172]

I should have kept reading the article, but after the first sentence I was done...the concept I feel is BAD. We all know that the government is having problems in the social security field and with health care sky rocketing, insurance companies, including the government, are paying less and less against the consumer to offset said expenses. With that in mind, any trade that would put MORE expenditures like this on the government's plate is BAD in my opinion. I feel this way only because I'm in the financial services field, and do A LOT of insurance, and it does not look good. Sorry Obama, you can keep your ideas and stop that smiling...it isn't going to sugar coat the deal for me :P

[Snate]

I still don't see why the government insists on enforcing fuel efficiency on companies and not on the consumers. The government should be working to change consumer buying habits.

[Dsuupr]

Sounds good, but in reality it probably isnt' what's going to happen.

[razoredge]

Boy oh boy, the whole damn thing is just a smoke screen. Hows about the Government getting controll of the health providers, drug companies and insurance companies in the first place ? Problem solved ! Hurricane = break the logjam, yarite it was a logjab alright, right up our ass's. government worried about oil consumption? , well the huge trucking, railroad, barge, ocean vessle industry used to move product from other counrtries into this would be a real good start. Then of course interstate shipping could have been contained if local economies and industries were not destroyed government -oil consumption - how much do we use with military games ? How about a few more quads and snowmobiles per household and great big trucks to tow them around with to trespass on land they are not supposed to be drivin on ? Soon will be time to get out the leaf blowers, how did man ever survive the centuries without them ? Perhaps the government could give our flatland fourwheel drive beautyparlor queens gas endorsements to help them offset the added expense of going to the store after the trip to the salon ? Nice distraction, this way we will avoid seeing the filthy level capitolism has reached in this country. I just know this all somehow has something to do with the blue collars and organized labor in this country - those damn Unions - yarite

[T-Keith]

The worst part is that they were already planning to improve fuel economy by that much, so they will jump at this deal and this guy will look like a hero. :rolleyes:

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Hows about the Government getting controll of the health providers, drug companies and insurance companies in the first place ? Problem solved !

Can I get an AMEN!?!?!?!?!

Why don't they? Well now, that would cut into their paychecks and kickbacks. And we wouldn't want that would we?

On that note, I find it funny that this country "claims" to be so anti-drug and anti-substance abuse, yet at the same time our major drug companies are allowed to DIRECTLY market to the consumer during prime time television, so much so that they have people ASKING their doctors for drugs that they might not even need. Even if the doctor says no, the consumer will continue to go to other doctors until SOMEONE fills the presciption.

It's kinda like not allowing cigarette manufacturers to sponsor NASCAR, America's "family" "sport" then truning around and slapping Viagra on the hood of one car and countless alcohol/liquor advertisements on 10-12 other cars.... You know CARS... CARS that do 200mph.

government worried about oil consumption? , well the huge trucking, railroad, barge, ocean vessle industry used to move product from other counrtries into this would be a real good start. Then of course interstate shipping could have been contained if local economies and industries were not destroyed

LOL.. Priceless...

I also find it funny that these people who are preaching to save oil, the journalists, the politicians, the actors, the singers, probably go back to a garage full of toys that is bigger than my house and a 5,000 square foot climate controlled mansion.

How much of our oil is sourced from North America again??? Aparently quite a bit judging by how the hurricanes effected gas prices (Or was that just on the refinery side?) Or better yet probably just gouging.

[regfootball]

"flatland fourwheel drive beautyparlor queens gas endorsements to help them offset the added expense of going to the store after the trip to the salon" LOL....I liked that one, its true but sad. I guess my thing here is support continuing cafe increases whether or not they are tied to anything else. Snate's point about regulating consumers isn't a bad idea. If we didn't depend so much on getting our oil from elsewhere, I would not support any sort of govt. influence on the consumption side, but since our entire existence is dependent on oil and realtions with other countries, folks do need to 'get' that our use is a part of our international policy. Really though, it wouldn't take much to increase cafe from 27.5 to say, 29.0 in like 3-4 years. mpg is more dependent on vehicle weight than anything. There are fuel suckers in every size class. A jetta does not need to weight 3400 pounds just like a large SUV could weight 500 pounds less with more efficent engineering and more use of lightweight materials. And crash safety would not have to take a hit for it either if we let the eingeers do their magic. I we cut vehicle weights 5% as a whole across the board, that would help. Aluminum, new unified vehicle wiring architecturesalone could make up those savings. I read once where it said that wiring now was like over 200 pounds a vehicle.

[razoredge]

Cars are too heavy, approaching levels that we were trying to excape with all the down sizing. Now were smaller but only 300-7oo lb less. In some cases heavier than the 60's & 70's midsize that were biger than our current fullsize. Thats why we need to add some hip and buttox air bags. How about a few own by the feet, "toe bags" "kneecap bags". How about some for the idiots that walkout infront of moving traffic "hood bags". How about some for flying off bridges into rivers and lakes "car bags", hell put parachute for soft landing too. Now we need at least 5 TV screens with individual computors, playstations, DVD's plus GPS so our children can see exactly where they are sitting in the car. Now lets not forget sound system, that needs to be at least as big as LedZeppelin was using in the 70's, na thats an insult those guys are grandpas we need 8-24" woooooofers with 35lb magnets and 30,000 watts with 100disc CD. Ill think of more later

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Less gov programs = less taxes = easier to afford healthcare yay im a genious :P

[CARBIZ]

Yeah, our idiot courts just allowed the Province Of BritishColumbia to sue the tabacco companies to recoup their health care costs. Duh? Last time I looked, cigarettes were legal. Full disclosure: I don't smoke. So we can see an example of the type of breathtaking logic we can expect from the government. However, having said that, energy is becoming a matter of national security. In fact, we in North America could just choose to ignore all those wackos in the Middle East if we didn't need their oil so damned badly. And health care is killing the Big Three. Face it gals: the U.S. consumes 25% of the world's oil. A 5% drop would be, like a million barrels a DAY saved. I know many people on this board are married to their Tahoes and Silverados, but we on this continent are the only ones on the planet who have the luxury of driving such vehicles enmasse. Not in South America, not in Europe. Not anywhere else.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

With GMs new V8s i dont see GM having any EPA issues anytime soon. What do you think a 4.8 Silverado will be able to get? 19/28? if thats the case might as well use a 4.8 instead of the 3.5L in the colorado (maybe squeeze out 20/29). i guess u could call GM the Honda of trucks now eh? lol Edited October 1, 2005 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[rjmel]

I don't see how helping the Big 3 pay healthcare costs in exchange for fuel economy is going to help anything. Not only does the govt become an enabler for HMOs to charge more, it doesn't help anyone who is not employed by the Big 3.

I also don't see how the govt would be able to regulate how much HMOs charge. Remember, we're Capitalist. The HMOs will say either pay what we want or go someplace else.

I think we should start with two things. First, America is the fattest nation in the world. Being obese causes diabetes, high cholesterol, high blood pressure, heart problems. The list goes on and on. What happens? Instead of losing weight to get rid of all these issues, people would rather take pills the rest of their life so they can have that cheeseburger. Sure, the pills will "control" it, but you have to see your doctor more often and have lab tests done to monitor the drugs and their effects. It's all economics: Less demand for the drugs/doctors, thus lower prices. Now I know there are some out there that are obese because of medical conditions, so this doesn't apply to them. Second, I live in Southern CA. You can imagine how many illegal aliens we have here. The US pays for all of their healthcare if they become ill. That's OUR tax dollars. They're here illegally and aren't supposed to be able to work meaning they're not paying any taxes (they also drive here illegally without a license and, thus, no insurance, which is why auto insurance costs more here too, but that's another story).

What I'm saying is, I think we should start with ourselves. We can't sit here waiting for the politicians to sort it all out. That could take years or decades! So get fit ,America, and we'll be less dependent on healthcare. :booyah:

And, no, I'm not an aerobics instructor http://www.cheersandgears.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/AH-HA_wink.gif

[sciguy_0504]

Illegal immigrants. It's amazing liberal groups like the ACLU are fighting for their rights (as well as the rights for terrorists). ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ARE NOT AMERICAN CITIZENS OR LEGAL VISITORS TO THE U.S. SO THEY DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHTS AMERICAN CITIZENS OR LEGAL VISITORS HAVE. Put them on planes, send them back. Build a "Great Wall of America" between Mexico - U.S. and Canada - U.S. so the military doesn't have to be deployed on the borders to try to stop these people.

[Member55]

So, instaed of the UAW giving up some of their benefits now I should not only pay for my own health ins. but partialy for theirs too. NO THANKS.

[TurboRush]

I think the basic idea behind this is the fact that foreing automakers such as Toyota and Honda are more advanced in production of hybrid and fuel efficient vehicles because they don't have to pay for health care for their employees in their country. This is cheaper for them and can put more money towards production and devellopement of fuel efficient vehicles. The big 3 on the other had is said to be lagging behind in those technologies and production due to the fact that they have huge health care expensive and that makes it unfair when compared to other automotive giants such as Toyota and Honda. The government thinks that by granting the big 3 health care, then they can concentrate expenses on fuel eficiency and advancing technologies and bring it to the dealership lots faster than before. Well we all know how it works, what goverment gives, must be taken from somewhere else......... what these companies receive, will most likely cause some money laundring scandals..... and where do we get with all of this? Back to square one.... If the plan worked on the other hand, we could have easier acces to ethanol fuels and better fuel efficiency out of our cars. Guess we'll just have to sit and wach what hapens, and in the mean time make our own arrangements for being efficient on fuel.... (hence some people convert their diesels to fry oil burning engines... some just stick to less cylinders under the hood)

[I hope GMRULES again]

If GM management have real brains they might realize one of these days that if you want to have a future you have to have fuel efficient vehicles, and a 2006 Tahoe that gets 20 MPG instead of 18 is not a fuel efficient vehicle. Toyota and Honda established themselves in North America this way.

[razoredge]

Taking illegals to immigration processing them then placing them on planes or buses and sending them away costs lots of money. Shooting them at the border is priceless. Fat is not the only expensive health care issue we have. People have always been fat unless your talking 1800's Apalacha. HTe biggest problem is the health providers working their job security, as well as prescribing medicine as a fix all and unless someone checks the doctor will always prescribe the most expensive designer drugs. Its a real scham, just pay attention and think about it next time you do visit your doctor. Man a mandatory sports physical for a teenager is $125.00 or at least it was, now is probably even higher. It amounts to little more than blood presure, weight and heart rate plus a few basic questions. In and out in 10 minutes. Its complete bull shit. Same with DOT physical, its more complex with eye and ear and urine tests but they are over 200 now, BS. Mandatory too, its the we got ya clause, Cha ching cha ching. The government, insurance industries and health providers promote this increasingly demanding and stringent mandatory "health care steps" that have drivin it throught he roof. Then they get the sheeple to take it out of their pockets. They are just working their job security and strenghening their wealth. Pa leeze keep your eyes on the source of the problem.

[Flybrian]

Taking illegals to immigration processing them then placing them on planes or buses and sending them away costs lots of money. Shooting them at the border is priceless.

[post="22912"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Okay, the United States of America is not going to shoot unarmed civilians crossing the border...

[Guest Josh]

This thread is a little enlightening. In the sense that I'm not the only one that sees what is wrong with this country. For the poster that said we need to start making changes in America. How can "we" as citizens do that when there's a new law day by day that prevents us from pursuing those changes without being considered a "terrorist" because of our views?

[razoredge]

Okay, the United States of America is not going to shoot unarmed civilians crossing the border...

[post="22917"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

:lol: Well we've lowered all our other standards, might as well complete the job.
It would only take a week or two, after that it would no longer be necessary. Like everyone always says sacrifices must be made :P

In reality the expence for immigration may rival that of welfare and like welfare they just keep comming back. I dont have the answer but something is wrong with the picture. Jailtime ? Really whats the answer, its been like swattin at May Flies but way more expensive.

[Snate]

Every form of government has its drawbacks. One of the main problems with democracy is that many simple problems with simple answers are complicated with "special interests".

[licadillac]

automakers successfully fought off any mandates that would require cars and trucks go farther on a gallon of gas THIS INFACT IS TRUE

[Snate]

automakers successfully fought off any mandates that would require cars and trucks go farther on a gallon of gas

THIS INFACT IS  TRUE

[post="22996"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

If the government told you that you had to spend a bunch of money upgrading your vehicles for essentially nothing (meaning consumers could care less about it), wouldn't you be against it too?

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

automakers successfully fought off any mandates that would require cars and trucks go farther on a gallon of gas

THIS INFACT IS  TRUE

[post="22996"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Maybe I'm mistaken, but I do believe the new agreement DOES in fact have increases. Not significant increases, but still increases.

If not then what is the point of having a "new" agreement.

Even still, the article should've been more clear that "automakers" also includes Nissan and the green do-gooder giant Toyota to name 2 instead of alm ost directly linking to the big 2.5

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

With GMs new V8s i dont see GM having any EPA issues anytime soon.

What do you think a 4.8 Silverado will be able to get? 19/28?
if thats the case might as well use a 4.8 instead of the 3.5L in the colorado (maybe squeeze out 20/29).

i guess u could call GM the Honda of trucks now eh? lol

[post="22804"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Unless you're the media.

The you'd call them hypocritical, piece of junk oil nazis apparently.

[Flybrian]

Unless you're the media.

The you'd call them hypocritical, piece of junk oil nazis apparently.

[post="23043"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

The media loves to show footage and comment on the horrible fuel economy of Escalades and Suburbans but never mentions the horrendous efficiency of a QX56 or Armada.